On poverty

What is hubris is for right-wing socialists, such as yourself, to promote economic policies that promote poverty and then do crocodile years about poverty.

 

Demand is important in a capitalist system, something right-wing socialists have problems understanding.

 

Right Wing? I've never voted Right in my life.

As for what I 'promote' ... I'm virulently opposed to the number one poverty creator that is the Welfare State. And the tears I cry are for the working class stiff who must fund the Welfare State - knowing that his lot is diminished, and so is the lot of those at the mercy of the Welfare State.

 

How does that answer my question? Want to try again?

 

What does that have to do with different cost of living IN the United States? You think our poor live a standard of living equal to those in Pakistan?

 

You have made it clear that you believe you own other people's rights to liberty.

But cannot refute even one sentence of them.

No, you made that up. They only "oppose private property" in the same sense that the abolitionists "opposed private property": i.e., private property in other people's rights.

Except for proving that your religion of the Great God Property is false, vicious, and evil.

Inevitably, unable to muster any form of factual or logical argument, you have to try to change the subject to me personally.

And you also, inevitably, have to resort to absurd strawman fallacies. I have never suggested that paying the community for secure, exclusive tenure should not get that tenure in return for the payment. I'd merely, unlike you, prefer to see the correct party paid for it.

 

It's precisely the Power Elite who own the property, and they are the ones who intend their property to include your rights. THAT'S how they plan to make us all helpless, and you are helping them by disingenuously pretending property "rights" favor the property-less. The top 1% now own half of everything. George Carlin made it clear, and it is now clearer than ever:

The relevant facts start at 1:25.

 

Are you also all for Communist policies ?

DO you agree that Communist polices are terrible for human rights? (or not)

The reason for the question is that I gather from your posts that much of what you advocate for does fit into a Communist ideology.

 

Question has an assumed, and/or highly debatable, if not totally false, premise.

You can't ask someone a question with a premise of which he or she does not share a common view with you.

You must first strive for a meeting of mind with that person, on the premise, first, and then, and only then, can you asked the question.

Now then, I'll address the core of your premise, which I will illustrate is not a question that can be asked, as the premise is false. A question with a false premise cannot be rightfully answered,

Communism is totalitarianism there are no shades of gray with communism, and no one is recommending it, let alone, myself.

Now, there some who are arguing that 'communism is anarcho-syndicalism' or some intellectualized variant, but I'm going to go with the more common view as it relates to history, that communism is totalitarianism, as evidenced by the Soviet Union, Cuba, North Korea, etc. The reason I'm going with that view ( and ignore whatever Marx actually says it is ) is that republicans and many on the right use those countries as a reference when mentioning communism. I'm not here to debate what is, and what is not, communism, other than use the definition that the right uses, which is that it is totalitarianism.

Therefore, per republican's common use of the term, communism is totalitarianism, that there are no shades of grey for communism, and owing to that concept, no one I know on the left, let alone myself, advocates communism. There is no such thing as 'a little bit of communism' i.e., it's an all or nothing proposition. Why? Because communism occurs, historically, via a revolution of some kind. It's a radical thing, not a gradual thing, so there is no shades of grey on communism, which is precisely why the premise of your question is false. There is, however, a phenomenon called creeping fascism, and we are seeing that with Trump.

I recommend, however, extricating yourself from the stronghold of such intellectual manipulators as Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Sean Hannity, Lou Dobbs, et al, and the right wing echo chamber, in general.

 

Well written Patricio.
Even though I think communism as a concept is at odds with human nature. I agree that what Stalin did for communism completely destroyed the concept. And I definitely agree that many mistake Stalin's totalitarianism for the face of communism.
Marx must be spinning in his grave

 

Interesting that you didn't mention the highly lopsided left media, or the dedicated to censorship left Social Media.

While you carte blanc point at 'Trumpism" as fascism......you ignore the true fascism of the left.

 

Well written, if you agree totally with his biases...thereby exposing your own.

as you pat yourself on the back, keep in mind, while Communist countries always need fences and the force of fear to keep people in....Trump needed a fence to keep people OUT.

 

The real solution to poverty is jobs education.

 

And all it takes is to fail one of those ONCE and people like you want to thow them away.

 

The corporate-owned media serve their corporate owners and no one else.

 

What do you consider 'true fascism of the left'? Give me an example.

 

That will help, but it goes back to my point, we'll never totally get rid of poverty, but with things like jobs, education, we can put a dent in it.

 

You are correct. There are just some people with mental and physical disabilities, and there isn't an infinite amount of high paying jobs. We need to make sure that people at the bottom can at least survive, and that educational opportunities are available without a mountain of debt.

 

No, you have it the wrong way round. Countries that need fences and the force of fear to keep people in are labelled communist.
The word has lost all its original meaning and become a definition of fascism.
Fascism: authoritarian nationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and of the economy
Communism: Communism is a socio-economic political movement. Its goal is to set up a version of society where the factories and farms are shared by the people, and would not have rulers or money.

Which one of the above do you think better describes China?
Communism is an unachievable Narnia at odds with human nature.

 

Don't buy the lie !

 

What lie

 

That Tigger's are wonderful things !? - just kidding that is a Truth!

The lie is that Blue see's nature for what it is and legislates with compassion.

 

Ah, I see. I'm sure a lot of Republicans care about the poor, but the attitude is certainly less forgiving.
Nearly every republican poster on here sides on the family values. work hard, don't commit crime, side of things. I've not yet seen one blame someone's activities on poverty.

 

Oh ... Red is even worse - no doubt about that - and they do not even apologize for it - kind of proud almost ?! .so - you get what you expect as they are the not the ones with the headbands reading "help the poor" unless it is connected to religious ..

Blue on the other hand parade's around .. party of the poor and the little guy - union workers and were strong advocates of "Civil Liberty".

at the end of the day - we get stumped from both sides.

 

Absolutely false people have overcome lots of those things, but the deal is don't put yourself in a position to have to in the FIRST place and if you do then don't at those of us who did to support you.